Good, Evil, or Some Combination Thereof: What Would Chaucey Say?

For the last couple of days as we've delved into the saucy satire of "The Prologue," one unifying concept has been lurking underneath it all: the inherent evil or good in human nature.  Indeed, this concept is present in literature throughout the ages (we will encounter it time and again in each piece we study this year) and has been pondered by philosophers at length.  

The following excerpt elucidates this idea further and appeared in an article in The New York Times on June 24, 2012:

Are human beings intrinsically good but corruptible by the forces of evil, or the reverse, innately sinful yet redeemable by the forces of good? Are we built to pledge our lives to a group, even to the risk of death, or the opposite, built to place ourselves and our families above all else? Scientific evidence, a good part of it accumulated during the past 20 years, suggests that we are all of these things simultaneously. Each of us is inherently complicated. We are all genetic chimeras, at once saints and sinners - not because humanity has failed to reach some foreordained religious or ideological ideal - but because of the way our species originated across millions of years of biological evolution.

~Edward O. Wilson

Bringing it back to Saucy Chaucey now: given the way we've seen Chaucer portray his characters in "The Prologue," do you think he would agree with the modern perspective of human nature as Edward O. Wilson describes it? Or would Chaucer be content to see humans as either good or evil, with no "gray areas" in between? Use evidence from the text to support your perspective!

I look forward to reading your responses. Since this response requires more time and effort, you have until 8pm on FRIDAY to submit your well-written comment! :)

Satire vs. Seriousness

Hello, sweet sagacious students of mine!

Your participation opportunity (due by 8pm Wednesday) is as follows: Chaucer uses satire in his attempt to effect social change.  Huxley, on the other hand, prefers a more somber tone in Brave New World.  Which method is the more effective way to communicate with an audience AND cause change: humor or seriousness?  You can use literature you've studied either this year or in the past to support your claim.

Remember to go in depth and WRITE AS AN HONORS STUDENT SHOULD: no grammatical/spelling errors, varied and impressive sentence structure, and ideas explored exhaustively!

Here's another one of my favorite parodies of all time: ESPN's SportsCenter reimagined by Key & Peele. It'll be pretty obvious to you why I enjoy it so much:

Satire vs. Parody

As we talked about on Friday during our extensive note-taking session, saucy Chaucey is keen on satirizing certain folks in "The General Prologue" of his Canterbury Tales. Satire, as I hope you remember, is a literary form/device that is used to ridicule individuals and/or society in an attempt to shame said individuals/society into improvement.

An important distinction needs to be made here between satire and parody.  Parody is also known as spoof or lampoon, and it is intended as mockery of another text/song/show, but not necessarily with the intent to shame anyone into ameliorating his/her ways.  It's usually just for chuckles.

The following video is one of my favorite more recent examples of parody:

http://www.nbc.com/saturday-night-live/video/web-exclusive-the-californians---dress-version/n13484?snl=1

So why is this parody and not satire?  Mainly because the writers/actors of SNL are probably just making fun of Californians (and the terrible TV dramas that are produced that supposedly depict life here) rather than making a deliberate attempt at helping us correct our ways. It's trying to make us laugh--not think.

Can you think of a movie/song/TV show that is of the satire or parody form? Describe it to us in a comment and explain why it's satire/parody and just what about it makes it so funny. BE SPECIFIC! Just naming Saturday Night Live isn't enough...name a specific sketch and describe what you love about it! Don't be afraid to take a stand and tell your classmates why they should love what you love! :)

Brave New World Quotation Analysis Practice: Quotation #2!

THIS BLOG POST IS MANDATORY AND WILL COUNT AS PART OF YOUR GRADE IN THE CLASS!!!!

After witnessing my lesson on Quotation #2 today (and hopefully taking copious notes as I taught), I thought it would be good for you all to get an idea of what it will be like to respond to a quotation for next Monday. So here's what I'd like you to do today...

1.) Review all your notes from my presentation today on Quotation #2.
2.) Review the directions for the writing opportunity.
3.) Set a timer for 25 minutes, and start writing your response to Quotation #2!

What's important here is that you truly adhere to the time limit. It's a little inauthentic to what will be happening next Monday since you'll be handwriting your response on Monday (here you're typing it), but it'll give you a sense for how you need to manage your time effectively in order to do the best work you can do in the time allotted.

You have until 8pm on Tuesday to get this MANDATORY BLOG POST done! Good luck!

Success in Our Brave New World

QUICK FYI: THIS IS A MORE IN-DEPTH BLOG THAN USUAL, SO YOU HAVE UNTIL FRIDAY AT 8PM TO POST YOUR COMMENT ON THIS ONE. :) 

The following very thought-provoking article appeared in The New York Times, and it relates to our work on Brave New World:

http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/08/31/who-will-prosper-in-the-new-world/?_r=0

Read the article. Then, write an eloquent response in which you use the Say-Mean-Matter structure to analyze Cowen's claims.

But what's Say-Mean-Matter? Thanks for asking! :) It is a handy structure that helps readers analyze written pieces in a meaningful way. Read on for details...

1. What does the text SAY? First, you must demonstrate understanding of the author’s argument. This would take the form of simply summarizing the salient points of the text. Ask yourself, and answer, questions like: What information is being presented? What facts are presented? The key here is to remain completely OBJECTIVE. You are reporting just the facts of what the author has written, without adding any analysis, interpretation, or opinion of those facts. In your summary, it would behoove you to use phrases like:

• The author demonstrates that ____.        
• He/she contends that ____.      
• In fact, the author acknowledges that ____.       
•  _____, he admits.

2. What does the text MEAN? Here, you need to analyze and interpret this information. What is your interpretation of what the author has written, and what makes you think so? The following phrases would be good ways to construct these sentences:

• Basically, X contends that ____.
• In other words, X believes ____.
• In making this comment, X argues that ____.
• X is insisting that ____.
• X’s point is that ____.
• The essence of X’s argument is that ____.

3. Why does the text MATTER? Here you answer the question “so what?” Why should anyone care about this? What is the significance, importance, or implication behind this text? What effect or impact should/does this text have on the reader or the world? Phrases like these work well to introduce this information:

• X’s theory of ____ is extremely useful because it sheds insight on ____.
• X’s point needs emphasizing since so many people believe ____.
• If X is right that ____, then society needs to reassess the popular assumption that ____.

All writing in English (and history, political science, psychology—you name it) connects back to this structure in some way, because in writing this way you prove that 1.) you read the text; 2.) you understand said text; 3.) you can analyze the text on a deeper level, and 4.) you can connect the text to a larger issue or theme, even if it’s just to answer a given prompt on tone or theme.

Do what you can with this. It would probably be best if you had three separate paragraphs, one for Say, one for Mean, and one for Matter. The Matter paragraph should have the most depth of analysis (and hence will likely be your lengthiest). I'm looking forward to reading your responses!